could be worse?

The last trips I had taken were to the following places: Holland, where the entire country is serviced by a network of ultra-efficient, timely, and comfortable trains that zip you from city to city in a matter of minutes. Of course, the country is not very big, so a trip from Maastricht to Amsterdam – basically from the west to the east of the country – is only a 2 hour journey. In the main city of Amsterdam, enough trolleys are running so as to scare unwitting pedestrians, and there is also a metro system. Transportation is not an issue and you are crazy to own a car. Ecuador, where what they lack in a train system is made up for in a bus system that will take you as quickly as possible (given the shape and condition of the roads) to any corner of the country accessible by road, from any other corner of the country. And, if these busses run even a couple of minutes late for, for example, waiting at a station hoping for more passengers, the populace on the bus begin to get rowdy, demanding that the bus leave at its scheduled time, not passively submitting to the authority of the bus company and assuming that their negligent practices are in service of a higher, unknowable cause. In the cities, the busses run everywhere from large avenues, to tiny cobbled streets. While it would be nice if the emissions standards were better (pedestrians inhale, routinely, the equivalent of 20 cigarettes worth of exhaust from passing busses), the service itself is constant and damn-near door to door, as you can ask the bus to drop you off wherever you want, and you can pretty much pick it up wherever you want too. And, Sweden, where the train from the airport to the center of Stockholm whizzes you at an incredible 130 miles per hour, making a 45 or so mile journey into a 20 minute joy-ride. This train is so efficient that it has only been reported off schedule 3 times in its entire existence. The city itself has a network of trolleys and subways that are clean, friendly, timely, and that will not be thrown off schedule for anything (a sublime subway moment happened in Stockholm as Anna and I were rushing to catch a bus. We were on one of the green lines and needed to get onto one of the red lines in order to get to the bus stop. The two lines run parallel for three or so stations in the center of the city. As we entered that zone, at the first shared station, the red line closed its door and left as we pulled into the station. The next red line train was not to arrive for another 6 minutes, which was too long for us to wait – we were really pushing it with time in terms of catching the bus. Our thought was that if we stay on the green line, perhaps we would catch up to the red train, or that the red train would wait an extra second or two for us at one of the other shared stations. No luck! At each of the three shared stations, there was a repeat performance of watching the doors close and the red train pull out of the station just as we pulled in. This required a devotion to efficiency on behalf of the system, and a respect for other people’s time on behalf of the citizenry, who did not suppose that their own personal dramas were worth inconveniencing an entire train’s worth of people by holding doors open or other such nonsense. As for us, we had to get out and take a cab in order to get to our bus on time, but everyone who remained on the trains had a smooth, incident-free commute. It’s a fair trade, and it serves us right for getting a late start (for all the talk of our having a society of individuals (which is an oxymoronic concept), the result is that when everyone acts in their own individual benefit (like holding doors open on the subway to make up for lost time – a necessity created by the individual’s negligence in leaving their house late), the society loses out, and while a “socialist” country like Sweden might not value individuality in such a way that it would be acceptable for a person to hold the doors of a train, individual responsibility comes to mean acting in a way that is beneficial to all and not just selfishly, which is ultimately more dignified (a person is not dignified when they are holding the doors of a train open))). So, in embarking on our most recent trip to San Francisco, I was more than prepared to come back with a report of yet another place in the world with better system and practices. I was especially ready to file this report upon the first leg of our journey, which was a long A train ride from 207th street to JFK. A long ride made even longer by the fact that the train was running local because it was nighttime. Why? Why can’t the C run at night? The whole reason the A runs express in the first place is that it runs an absurdly long route – one that takes about 2 hours under the best circumstances. Does that change at night? Does a person traveling from 207th to Far Rockaway not deserve a means of transport that gets him home in less than 2 hours because it is night?
Anyway, I was wrong.
San Francisco has two train services – the BART and the MUNI, which are mutually exclusive companies. You cannot use BART tickets on MUNI and vice versa. In that way, they are like the Metro-North/LIRR and the NYC subway service. MUNI trains and busses, however, share ticketing. There is also the old-fashioned cable car, which is a totally different story. However, San Fancisco is not directly equitable to New York, so the fact that the relationship between BART and MUNI is similar to the Metro North and subways does not mean it is 1:1. For example, Metro North is mainly a commuter train. Yes, there are specific points in the city from which you might opt to take Metro North rather than the subway. My apartment comes to mind. I happen to live directly next to a Metro-North station. And, I happen to live in an area of the city from which it is very difficult to take subways to, say, the east side of Manhattan. Those two factors together make it so that if I have to go to the east side of Manhattan, I will most likely take Metro North – especially if it is the weekend and I can get the $3.50 fare. However, if I had to go out of my way to get Metro North, I probably would not take it within the city. And, for example, if I lived on 125th and Lexington, where there is a subway and a Metro-North stop, and I needed to get to 42nd street, where there is also a subway and Metro North stop, I would never ever take the Metro North for that trip. It would not be worth the extra money. The subway can take me that route for half the price. Yes, I would be sacrificing comfort and speed, but still, it would not be worth it. In San Francisco, BART actually competes with MUNI for destinations within the city itself. If you are at Powell street and needed to go to the Mission, then it wouldn’t make sense to take the MUNI. It is more expensive and slower. BART prices vary by distance, and within San Francisco, it is pretty cheap. It gets more expensive if you want to go to Oakland or Berkeley, or the airport, or any other surrounding-area type place. But, MUNI does not compete with BART for these destinations. Anyway, point being, you might live in New York City and never ever take Metro North, but if you live in San Francisco, you probably take BART; and MUNI.
The BART is short and squat and shaped like a giant isosceles triangle. I am just about taller than BART is. When BART enters the station it makes a noise like a screaming ghost. BART has upholstered, soft seating and wall to wall carpeting: I hope San Francisco does not have bedbugs. There is dedicated space for bikes on BART and the straphangers on BART actually hang on to leather straps. On the BART platforms, the rubber portion that tells you that you are too close to the edge, are painted both yellow and black. The black sections are where the doors open. This may seem convenient: In New York, for example, knowing where the doors open is a matter of experience, research, and luck. However, the black spots just mean that everyone crowds the black spots on the platforms and jockeys for a space in the black spot and winds up standing directly in front of the doors as they open, making it a bit of a mess for people getting out of the train. Getting out of the train station itself is a pain. Since fares increase with distance, and there are no ticket takers coming through the train as there are on Metro North (and on Stockholm’s trolleys), tickets must be entered into a turnstyle upon entering and exiting stations. There are not enough turnstyles. Lines form at each exiting turnstyle. Even if there were initially enough turnstyles, they are not equally distributed between entering and exiting. There are more turnstyles for getting in than for getting out. There may be only 2 exit turnstyles at a major station. To compound it, going through the turnstyles is not a simple act of walking through: you have to put your ticket in the machine and take it out of the machine before you can go through. People get this wrong and take even more time. One station had only its down escalator working, further servicing the entering passengers to the detriment of the exiting. Purchasing tickets is a pain. There are ticket booths that accept cash, and machines that accept cards. On the machines, though there is a keypad, there is no option for punching in the exact amount of money you would like to put on the card. The machine automatically assumes you want to put $20 on the card, and gives you the option to either increase or decrease that amount by $1 or by $.05. So, in order to buy a card worth $8.60 (the amount that will get you from the airport to Powell street), rather than touching 3 buttons (an “8”, a “6”, and a “0”), you have to touch 20 buttons to get the price to $8.60 from the default of $20. This is absurd. The BART is often held at stations for undisclosed reasons. There is only 1 BART track that runs through the entire city of San Francisco, and through most of Oakland too. There are 5 BART lines. By comparison, Metro North converges all 3 of its East-of-Hudson lines onto one track at 125th street, making it that all trains run on the same track for only 1 stop. Some BART lines run as few as 5 stops independent of other lines. This is not many.
The MUNI runs busses and 3-car trolleys throughout the city. These trolleys go underground at times too. The busses are largely electric, meaning that they produce zero emissions and that they run attached to electrical wires above, with two long poles attaching the bus to the wires sticking out of the bus’ roof. Tickets for the trolley are $2 and you pay money into a machine as you walk onto the train. The conductor then gives you a flimsy piece of paper, ripped off at a certain spot that indicates a time until which you can ride any line. This time is usually 2 hours in the future. This is a marvelous waste of time and a burden on the train conductor who has to drive the train AND rip pieces of paper. Tickets should automatically eminate from the machine into which you put money. There is also the option to buy a multi-day pass and simply scan it as you walk on. Trolleys, when running outside, are subject to traffic lights. When running inside, the all run on one track – and this happens throughout the entire area of downtown San Francisco. There are many lines and the convergence onto one track slows service.
The A train ran express when we arrived back into NYC.

subject to search

On the 1 train, there is no computerized voice telling you what stop you are at and what stop is next. It is only a matter of time, of course. But, for now, a human being makes the announcements over the loudspeaker and there are times when they even forget to tell us what stop is next. This does not happen often, but I’ve seen it happen. I’ve also seen it happen that they announce the wrong stop, or stumble over their words, etc. While I am not here to make an ascetic point or anything like that, I must admit that the element of human error has its nostalgic allure. And, while I am not here to make an ascetic point, I am most definitely here to make a point about how gross non-asceticism can be at times.

For example, with the computerized 6 train, or L train, for example, it can be understood that if it were a company rule that a certain amount of messages of the post-9/11 variety must be given (and these can be defined by their dehumanizing nature, encouraging passengers to think of one another as potential terrorists or otherwise untrustworthy beings in need of guidance from a computerized voice), that the computerized voice could be programmed to deliver those messages. However, on the 1 train, with all of its human foibles, to hear a real live man’s voice state that “packages and other large containers are subject to random search by the police” without any knowing wink or nod to the fact that he is being forced to deliver this message under threat of unemployment can be a bit jarring. In fact, on one particular train, the conductor making the announcement did a particularly effort-laden job to make his voice sound sort of like Barry White’s. His voice sounded like that when he was announcing what station we were that and it just continued on sounding like that as he gave the terrorism-related message. Whatever was charming in his delivery until that point was ruined by the message. His funny-in-how-smooth-it-was voice took on a sinister edge as far as I was concerned, and after he gave the message, the voice grated my eardrums as it annouced stop after stop.

Now, I am sure that he did not give that message spontaneously. those were not his words and he is just doing what needs to be done to keep his job etc. I am not particularly mad at him.

I remember when those types of messages first started infiltrating the MTA. The premise, of course, was that anyone could be a terrorist and that the best way to combat terrorism was to remain vigilant at all times and notice when terrorists (who are among us all the time) were about to terrorize and then pounce on them. Basically do what the people did on the 9/11 plane in Pennsylvania. Everyone is given the opportunity to live out their greatest (adventure) movie fantasy and save the day for America. And as far as the bag inspection is concerned, well, clearly having our bags randomly checked by police as we enter the train station would deter terrorists because... well, its proactive. We are taking the fight to them, etc. and if a few regular citizens have to be violated in the process, then so be it - it’s for the greater good, bla bla. When those messages first started coming out, I remember wondering how they were ever goign to be phased out. What would have to happen in order to return to the days before having my commute interrupted by messages about how I was under surveillance or could be? I knew it at the time, and I know it now: the only thing that is going to reverse that is organized action. The problem is that the purveyors of paranoia have been building off of their achievements, developing entire lifestyles out of delivering messages of doom. It is for this reason that hearing a real live person deliver the message is that much more jarring - a computerized voice cannot communicate a communal feeling, and if a live voice cannot either, then the extent of isolation that has occurred is daunting. if the messages are delivered in earnest, then hope wanes. Looking around as the message comes through the speaker, people (other passangers) are to be seen with headphones in, or staring at screens, or just trying really really hard to mind their own business. Not a knowing pair of eyes lifted. It is a major part of the ethos of a New Yorker to be able to exist in solitude amongst many.

1 train stopped between 215 and 207. Creeping along, lurching. Why go at all if not at a steady pace?

4 train stopped in tunnel before 42nd. 6 train wating at 42nd. Closed doors and left. So many decisions had to be made for it to happen that way. And it was an unjust end.

Waited 10 minutes for A train. Rush hour. Seems like a lot. Then, it didn't go at full speed after 42nd street. Timed to enter 59th with C. Annoyed.

The 1 train stopped and waited at 96th street. The 3 train went at half speed all the way to 42nd street. The 1 train waited at 42nd.

squeaky

I have developed the habit of running for the train whether or not I see it coming. This is partly because I am always late, partly because I think I have an idea of when the train is supposed to come, partly because it makes me nervous to walk towards the elevated train at a perpendicular angle and to be able to see the train as it would arrive in the station and leave the station without me on it. From the moment I leave my building, my only view that is in front of my face is the perpendicular view of the elevated subway and the vision that goes before me is that of the train pulling out of the station and the fear that engenders in me is that of me having to wait, impatiently, and the thoughts that produces are those of re-enactments of my morning minus various increasingly inane-seeming moments that without which would have landed me leisurelyly at the train, and thus at work on time.

In running, it occurs to me that the AM newspaper lady stands sort of blocking the staircase and that annoys me. It occurs to me that I am faster going up the stairs than most people and it annoys me that people don’t instinctively organize themselves into fast lanes and slow lanes, etc. I am fully aware that I am projecting onto others my own dissatisfaction with being lazy around the house in the morning. Anyway, I got up the stairs on time and people were standing around in the indoor area – not even trying to get on the train, just hanging out by the turnstyles and talking. In my haste, I brushed up against one of them as I tried to get in through the turnstyle: “Hey, it’s just a train” he said. And, maybe he was right. I excused myself and wound up getting onto the platform just as the train was coming into the station. I sat down and a guy who had been employing my same running strategy, but 10 paces back, swung onto the train. He was good though because he had to buy a metrocard too, I noticed. We acknowledged each other.

For my efforts, I was treated to a train in bad need of a tune-up, or maybe just even a tune of any sort. The bell that indicates that the door is about the close sounded sick and/or hoarse. The tone was fragmented and dull. At 168th street a lot of people got on, I guess, and the doors were having trouble closing whether because they were closing onto people and their bag straps or loose, flowing clothing – or for other reasons. The doors opened and closed several times and the bell rang so often in its raspy way that it annoyed me. I felt that it mocked me. After that, there was a high pitched noise that emanated from the ceiling. I couldn’t tell if I was imagining it or not because everyone on the train was acting like nothing strange or annoying was happening because they are all New Yorkers and have to endure things like ear-splitting noises on their way to work just to prove that they are living in a place that challenges them or, better yet, simply to prove that they have something to endure. Or something. I alternated between thinking that it was a noise that was coming from inside of me and thinking that it was a noise from the ceiling of the train. It didn’t stop and I was thinking about the noise a lot and never let it get to the point of simply becoming background noise that I would just see as silence. I soon began having a headache and feeling nauseous.

So, at 96th street, it was no difficult decision for me to take to get off the train and wait for the express. However, the express didn’t come until after three more locals passed by 96th street. After I got off the 1 at 96t, I poked my head into the car next to the one I had been on only to find that there was no high pitched noise. There wasn’t.

In other news, the 1 train has been running on weekends over the past couple of weekends. I am not too excited about this, rather, I feel it is a cynical poly taken by the MTA to run trains on the weekends during the holiday season for the sake of getting people more easily to their shopping destinations and to impress tourists. I think it is a fact that it is why the trains are running on the weekends now. After those two or so months of work being done on the uptown stations, we have 207th and 215th with patches of roof missing, and that’s the only noticeable change that’s been made. I prefer to take the A train from Isham street rather than partake in the MTA’s cynical charade. Anna would prefer the 1 train weren’t running so she could get home easier from Piper’s Kilt because when the 1 train isn’t running the shuttle bus leaves pretty frequently from outside Piper’s Kilt (more or less) and when there is no shuttle bus she had to wait for the Bx7 bus, which took hours upon hours to arrive.

I C you...

The C train doesn’t do as much as it could, and it hides in the shadow of its big brother, the A train, hoping that no-one notices. The C train is one of the only trains in the system to retain the corrugated tin look. Other lines might have one or two trains that have that rolled up aluminum exterior, but the C is the only one to exclusively sport that look. It is also a couple of cars short, making a pain for anyone who has ever waited at the back of the platform for it only to then have to run (or feign nonchalance while walking really really fast). These are physical deformities, though, and it would be unfair of me to pick on it for that. However, when you look at the map, and analyze its route, you also see that not only is it ugly and short, but it is also lazy.

Traveling from 168th street all the way to Euclid Ave. in Brooklyn is no easy feat. For such a short, deformed train, the C maintains a fairly long run compared to most other trains in the system. However, its true lazy nature can only be appreciated when compared with its big brother and line/color mate, the A train. The A train is made into a confused overachiever with multiple personality disorder if you look at its behavior in Brooklyn and Queens. After all, where does the A train wind up? Far Rockaway? Lefferts Boulevard? The other side of Far Rockaway? All three are correct. But, how can that be? Why do we have one train running to three different and distinct locations? How confusing is that for people getting on to have to not only wait for an A train, but then wait for the correct A train. The A is helped out in Far Rockaway by a shuttle train, but it splits duty between its other two destinations. With this as a given, how does it even make sense that the C train would stop at Euclid Ave? Why have a train running the same line as another train and have one of those trains stop midway while the other goes to two different destinations?

The solution: Run the C train permanently to Lefferts Boulevard. Run the A train Permanently to Far Rockaway. Why can’t that happen? The only reason I can think of would be that with all the extra stops (7 of them), and the same amount of trains dispatched, C train service would be more sparse, which is something that really shouldn’t happen or else the C train will just be a ghost. But, remember from a few posts ago that we have already discontinued the B train and given some of its service and machinery over to the C train – that handles some of the additional needed traffic.

This way would be far more elegant than the way that is there now. It will also serve the purpose of giving the C train a designated task independent of the A train, which will help it create a more positive image of itself.

beware the unhealthy

On Monday mornings, after a weekend of neglect and (a case could be made) repression, I expect the 1 train to be on its best behavior. I expect to see a shiny, clean train gliding into the station with a smile on its face, happily greeting all of us commuters who have been trapped in our small neighborhoods all weekend. I am generally disappointed, as I was today, when the train came on time, fine, but without a discernable smile or any noticeable cleanliness.

157th street is always the station I use to gauge how I feel about my commute. This works for me in either direction. Usually, if I am not thinking about it, and the thought pops into my head, hmmm… I’ve been on the train for a while, what station am I at? It is 157th street. It is kind of uncanny. Depending on my mood, it is either, Oh, we’re already at 157th? Or How can we only be at 157th? It is kind of a no-man’s land in my journey – sort of far from home, and sort of far from any potential transfer to another train (I decline to acknowledge the elevator situation at 168th street as a proper transfer). I am stuck on my path at that point. In any case, one stop after 157th street today – at 145th street – the train halted in the station.

The initial (and as it turns out, only) reason for this transgression was that there was a sick passenger and that the train was being held in the station and it was also indicated that it wouldn’t be moving any time soon. The guy and girl next to me got a good laugh out of this. Their situation was one in which (from what I inferred through not having my earphones on) they had known each other, perhaps in high school. Now they were in college and just happened to run into each other. They were never really close, but the guy is cooler than what he used to be, and has lots of Important Things he is doing. The girl was friendly and offered up stories of parties and annoying co-workers. They were happy to be young and made jokes about the train stopping in the station because they were really just getting to know each other as adults and it was not a time to be grumpy. I was not so confined. The thing with the “sick passenger” is this: if the person isn’t in your car (and there is a 90% chance that this is the case) then the reality of the situation does not settle in. So, 90% of the people on the train could not give a shit about this supposed sick passenger, and begin to question whether there is such a person. Then, there is a terminology issue. “Sick passenger” makes it seem like someone somewhere has the sniffles or something like that, which while unfortunate, certainly does not seem to warrant the stopping of an entire train and the inconveniencing of the rest of its passengers. This perception is encouraged by ad campaigns against being the sick passenger, exhorting people who don’t feel well to stay off the train. If the sickness is more severe than the sniffles, or some such ailment, then it would not be useful to tell people not to get on the train if they are “under the weather.” That type of ad only works for people who have the types of illnesses that are common, yet manageable enough so that they can at least attempt to go to work. No ad would ever say, “if you feel like you might catch a heart attack, or a brain aneurism, or spontaneous paralysis, don’t get on the train today.” That would be absurd.

So, we have been trained by the MTA’s very ad campaign strategies to associate the term, sick passenger with a person feeling, “under the weather”, who is distinct from a person who just had a heart attack. But, it might be that someone has had a heart attack, brain aneurism, or sudden paralysis. In fact, it may even be likely, because it would be those types of situations that would necessitate the stopping of a train. These people cannot simply walk off the train and be sick on the platform like a person with a cold could. So then, why not simply announce that “There is a passenger who is immobilized and dying. We will be in the station until proper medical personnel arrive.” This would be alarming, no doubt, but it would also give the rest of the passengers a feeling of purpose, and a feeling that we are not being treated like children. A person with a heart attack is not “sick.” We don’t need euphemisms as commuters.

In any case, after working all of this out in my head, the next announcement made was that everyone had to get off the train and that the train was now out of service. This too was incomprehensible. It was a total reversal of reasoning. Clearly there had been no sick passenger in the first place. Or, the train was being used to transport the sick passenger to a station closer to a hospital? No. They lied, and tried to use a pathos inducing reason to cover their malicious ways. How does a sick passenger become a busted train? And, how does a train that rolls swiftly out of the station with all of its passengers packed onto the platform become out of service? Does out of service mean unable to further transport people because of a technical malfunction (that does not preclude its swift roll out of the sation)?

cartography

One of the premises of this blog – that is, one of the things that is assumed upon the reading of this blog is that it is absurd that there should be irregularities in train service more than 30 percent of the time you ride the train. I began writing with the intent of simply logging the irregularities. It has turned into something more like a narrative. I am not upset about this, but it should be mentioned that I am not logging each and every incident of irregular service.

The other day, however, on the 1 train, on the way home after work a bit after rush hour, I had a bit of a long commute. The stated reason was that there was a signal malfunction at 72nd street. It was also stated that there was a stalled train at 72nd street. The consequence of this was that all 1 trains would be running express from 72nd to 96th street. The unstated consequence was that all 1 trains would be running at about 1 mile per hour until 72nd street. The reality of the situation crept up on everyone as they noticed the train’s decreased momentum, frequent stops between stations, and extended stays in stations, tempers began to flare and people began rolling their eyes, cursing under their breath and overall looking like emerging psychopaths. As for me, I questioned why a train stalled at 72nd would have meant decreased service at 28th. It seems like they had the logistics under control. Trains would go express from 72nd to 96th. Ok. So, maybe there would be a slight delay if there was a 1 train trying to cross over to the express track while a 2 or 3 was passing by. But a) that shouldn’t begin a chain of events that reverberates all the was back to 28th street, b) that chain of events should not include as much slowness and stopping as it did.

Of course, by the time the train got to 72nd street, everything had been solved, I guess, because we pulled into the local side of the platform just fine. Then, continued on locally as if nothing had ever happened. There were no more announcements, no more delays, etc. of course, we were about 10-15 minutes behind where we should have been, so I did not feel free, as a result, to let me concentration waver. Why should my concentration wavering have to do with anything? Well, I have been trained by past experience to expect, when there is the slightest delay in service, to have assorted stops skipped, and that these skipped stops might include 225th street. So, in anticipation of this announcement, I denied myself access to my portable music, thus decreasing the quality of my commute. Of course, just as I prepared for the worst, nothing happened. The train ran normal from 72nd to 225th (and presumably to 242nd) and I resisted the urge to feel lucky or good or thankful or anything like that. It is, of course, supposed to stop at 225th, so why feel any particular way about it?

Speaking of being supposed to stop at 225th, another annoying thing: In checking the ultimately depressing and standard-lowering posterboards of weekend service changes that have crept into every train station, this week does not acknowledge that the 1 train would be continuing its skipping of every stop north of 168th street over the weekends. On Monday and Tuesday, I was feeling ok about this. Perhaps they finished what they were doing? But by Wednesday, even though the posterboards weren’t changed, the 1 train began accumulating individualized posters claiming that for the next 2 weekends, service would not exist north of 168th street. It is the same poster that they have been using, except that they dates are changed. Why was this information not included on the original posterboard? Did they not know? Was it a spontaneous decision to continue the work they had started? And as always, why only put the next 2 weeks as the dates for the service obliteration? Are we supposed to believe, again, that in two weeks, everything will be fine? My challenge to the MTA is to be honest. Those posterboards are too print heavy, and most people are accustomed to getting information about train service from train maps – New York having an especially famous one. I say that if they know that service is going to be a certain way for a period of more than a few months, new maps should be produced to reflect those changes. On the New York subway map, the 1 train, for example, should officially be represented by a dashed (rather than solid) line north of 168th street, denoting contingent service. Having it on the map would make it official. Having it on that posterboard makes it seem not-that bad. Artists and cartographers should be at work on this.

Also, the next day, the downtown train stopped at 96th street and waited for a 3 train before taking off. The announcement cited “a scheduled adjustment” as the reason for the delay. What the hell is that?

skipped stops

On two consecutive days, the 1 train skipped many of the stops it was supposed to make on my way home. I remember back in the early 2000’s, the last time I lived in the Bronx before a couple of weeks ago, it was during the time of the 1/9 train madness. Incidentally, one of my clues as to who was and was not a native New Yorker was by noticing who acknowledged the existence of the 9 train by when describing the local train service on northern Broadway. For most native New Yorkers, it was my impression that they just never got used to saying 1/9 instead of just 1. For me, it was a calculated stance never to acknowledge the existence of the 9 train because of the patent absurdity of its premise for existence. For the same reasons why I think it is ridiculous for trains to wait in stations for other trains to pull into the station across the platform, I think the idea of skip-stop service is dumb. Skip stop service was not the same as express service. Express service takes people long distances in one stop. Skip stop service just skipped stops. Say you have a certain amount of people who are at 96th street who are going to get on the train and get off at 145th street. There are also a certain amount of people at 96th street who are going to get off at 157th street. Let’s assume that the amount of people in both cases is more or less the same. Now, with skip stop service, those two groups of people cannot get on the same train. Some had to get on the 1 train, and some had to get on the 9 train. So, if a 1 train came first, and the 1 train stopped at 157th street (but not 145th street), then the people who were able to get on would get home slightly quicker than they would have if there were no skip stop service. Meanwhile, the people who live at 145th street and had to stay waiting for their train would get home slightly later than they would have if there were no skip stop service. So in the end, nobody is really convenienced. The only way to ensure real convenience for the most amount of people is to send more trains and keep them running on their schedule without manipulation. The skip-stop service might have made the trains seem less crowded, but platforms were more crowded. Again – unless you are sending more trains, and running them at regular intervals without manipulation, service is not better.

Those were my thoughts as I waited on the platform at 18th street for what seemed like an extended period of time. Because of the skip-stop mentality of the MTA, I know that anytime I have to wait for an extended period of time for a train, not only is it annoying in itself, but I also have to worry that the train is going to pull something weird and not stop at my stop in the name of making up time on the schedule. On Wednesday, what happened was that the train skipped from 72nd to 96th, from 137th to 168th, from 168th to 207th, and then it went regular the rest of the way. This was during rush hour. I was “lucky” this time in the sense that it still stopped at 225th. Obviously, lots of other passengers were not so lucky. Now, those were 6 stops that were skipped (not counting Dykman, which is out of commission until 2011). So, when I was at 18th street, the train ahead of me might have been at 66th street, in order for us to pull off that many skipped stops without catching up to the train preceding us. Why the large space in the first place? What was happening to make that separation take place? It couldn’t just be people holding the doors. Any mechanical malfunction would not have just magically gotten better…

Speaking of which, the next night, me and my family got on the 1 train at 14th street (after enduring some bizarre guitar-based subway performances at the L’s 1st ave stop and then again in the tunnel walkway between the L and the 1) and things started well enough. We got to 18th street in no time, but then we just sat there with the doors open; and sat there. Eventually, an announcement came on saying that there was a problem with the doors. After a short while, the doors closed. I was thinking, “oh, they must have fixed the problem, or else the doors wouldn’t close.” But, once the train set off, it did so at a snail’s pace, and then came to a full stop between stations. Then I was thinking, “I wonder what this has to do with the doors?” the train then proceeded this way for the next 20-25 minutes, until it got to 96th street, when it began running at regular speed. Of course I was happy that the train began running at regular speed and didn’t stop between stations. But, the fact that it, all of a sudden, was without door trouble and was able to run regularly threw into question the whole mechanical issue in the first place. Of course, in order to make up for lost time, the train decided to skip stops uptown. This time I was not so lucky, 225th was to be skipped. And, despite the conductor’s angry, annoyed commandment that there was a train right behind this one, Anna and I decided to get off at 215th and walk up. It was raining and it was midnight. The “train behind this one” passed over us as we crossed over the Broadway bridge.

sorry b train

Sorry B train – nobody needs you. I’m not saying that we don’t appreciate your expressness (when there isn’t construction going on) in Brooklyn. I’m not saying that we don’t appreciate your stopping throughout the Bronx during rush hours while the D runs express. I’m just saying that all of your accomplishments come in supporting roles for other, more important trains. In fact, you are the only train in the entire system that does not have a station of its own. You are a mooch, in other words.

It seems strange that the B train would be such a useless vessel. Alphabetically speaking, the B seems like it would be pretty important. That is, when people began making trains and then began making names for those trains that correspond to letters in our alphabet, the B train was most likely the second one conceived (we know, however that the reality of the situation is more complex – but it would seem that B would be important). So, how could so prominent a letter be allowed to sink so far into obscurity so as to in fact be unnecessary and burdensome?

It was not always this way. The B used to run on its own line in Brooklyn, servicing many without help. The more obscurely lettered Q train did the work the B train currently does (in support of the new, yellow Q train, I might add) in Brooklyn. These were also the days in which the B train made a random detour into Roosevelt Island during weekends. That was weird. But, better than what it does now during weekends, namely, not run! And what about nights? No. So, we have here a train that does not have a station that it and it-alone serves that does not even bother to run on nights and weekends. Why do we have this train at all? If it is not servicing anyone in particular, then what distinguishes it as an individual subway line other than the fact that it used to be more distinguishable but as a result of random MTA shuffling of trains lost all personality – and the fact that it is called by a very recognizable letter that would be conspicuous in its absence from the pantheon of New York subway parlance? Nothing.

Here is the solution: Eliminate the Q train and call it the B train. There is no reason to have a Q train and no H train or P train (I sort of understand why there is no K train – because of the fact that there used to be, and even sort of less understand why there is no I or O train – because they are vowels lesser vowels?). Those who ride the Q train and derive a sense of self relative to its quirkiness need develop more substantial personality traits. Take the amount of all the B trains that are currently deployed, and split that number by three. 1/3 of those trains will be known as the (B diamond), thus indicating its role as an express train during rush hours through Brooklyn. 1/3 of those trains will become additional C trains, to help out that decrepit line. 1/3 of those trains will become (D diamond) trains, thus indicating that it runs local through upper Manhattan (as the current B does), and express in the Bronx (as the current D does during rush hours).

fireworks

I wouldn’t compromise my integrity by taking the shuttle to the A train this weekend. Instead, I chose to walk the 10 or so blocks from 225^th street to Isham (it would seem, numerically to be more than 10 blocks – but I really think it isn’t) and got into the station with no problem and at the exact moment an A train was pulling in. No rush, considering that it is the first stop and it usually sits there for a while. Lucky thing I wasn’t rushing too because people poured out and packed the staircases making it difficult to get down to the platform. I didn’t blame them. Of course, these were not only the people who live at or around 207^th street, but also those who live anywhere north of 207^th street and would normally be on the 1 train. Considering that Yonkers, on this side of town, starts at 263^rd street, this meant that an extra nearly-three miles worth of people were getting out of the train at once.

It seemed to me that, with that as a fact, and with the fact of the A train’s lengthy, time consuming run being taken into consideration, that at least some, if not lots of time would have to be taken at the 207^th street stop in order to not necessarily clean to the point of spic-n-span, but at least to do some straightening up before heading back all the way to Far Rockaway, or Ozone Park, or wherever this A train was going. So, you can imagine my shock when on the staircase still, I overheard the conductor’s announcement that the train would soon be leaving the station. Hearing this, I rushed down the steps and onto the train – perhaps knocking into some people along the way. As I suspected, the train was littered, and the floor sticky, with criss-crossing trails of spilled iced-tea and beer making patterns on the floor. It’s all part of the A train, which with each passing day acquires an increasingly “vintage” look.

At Dykman street, it was announced that the next stop would be 175^th street, thus skipping 190^th and 182st. What? Really? Can we really be that far behind schedule? Well, I guess that explains the hurry at 207^th and the lack of any attempt to straighten up the train for its run. But, really? I mean, there is no 1 train service, meaning that everyone who would normally get on the 1 train at 191^st or 181^st has to take the A train in order to go anywhere, so they had to take the elevator and go through that hardship just to get to the A in the first place. Add to them, the regular A passengers – and we just skip them by? It seems wrong, does it not? Forcing everyone onto the A train platform only to skip them. Even if we were behind “schedule” (in quotation marks because such a document has never been spotted posted in any public space), it would seem that any entity with a modicum of sympathy or ability to self-reflect would understand that the badwill wrought by skipping those at 190^th and 181^st will not be worth the apathetic goodwill of those at 175^th who had the train arrive on a mythical schedule.

Consider the following: the A train always – ALWAYS – travels at the speed of a snail between 145^th and 125^th streets. Why? It did so yesterday. Then also, after getting from 125^th street to 72^nd street at about the speed an express train would be expected to run – that is, fast with no interruption, the A mysteriously slowed down and then came to a complete stop between 72^nd street and 59^th. This is never warranted, though it would be slightly less unwarranted if there were a D train up ahead. However, nothing in the A train’s behavior up until that point had indicated that there was a train blocking traffic up ahead. Then, cutting through the tunnel’s darkness was a C train on the local track across the way. When the C train passed, the A got up the energy to finish its journey through to 59^th street. The C and the A entering the station together as though best friends holding hands.

Now, it is possible that the A train was really just stuck there and just so happened to fix whatever problem it was having as soon as the C passed it by (remember the fact that this train was so “behind schedule” that it needed to skip 190^th and 181^st streets). However, it is my theory that something more sinister is at play. Something so superficial and petty so as to constitute a scandal: It is my theory that the MTA designs it so that the two trains enter the station at the exact same moment so as to wow the passengers at the station with the plethora of options presented to them. To give the passengers a feeling of adundance. The passengers already on the train are but a captive audience – bit players in a lame fireworks display – one meant to elicit a small feeling of “wow” from the few while not caring about the groundswell of unhappy rebellion brewing among the many.

the 2 and 5 are in an abusive relationship

The 2 and 5 trains are in an abusive relationship. They are at their best when they are apart, and don’t know how to properly relate to each other when together. They try, though. They break up and make up in Brooklyn and the Bronx. In Manhattan they put on their best faces, go their separate ways and thrive. But, the allure of abusive love is too strong – so strong that even when they are at their most productive – whizzing through Manhattan at top speeds, this speed and efficiency only bolsters their egos, lets them think that they’ve mastered their issues so that coming back together will be a uniting of two strong forces. But as in any bad relationship, the pairing is not so much a sum of the two parts as it is a melding of the worst aspects of the two, as they infinitely seek the better half.

Let me explain: in Manhattan, the 2 and the 5 run express. So, if your commute is from uptown Manhattan to downtown, you might only know the 2 and the 5 as a lucky break that will get you to work faster. But, in Brooklyn – when the 5 decides to follow the 2 into Brooklyn – the two share a line through Flatbush all the way to Brooklyn College. This only happens at certain time so of day. Most other times, the 5 can’t take what it has coming and has to stop at the bottom of Manhattan. In the Bronx, the two come together almost immediately, at 149^th street, and continue onwards together until the Bronx Zoo, over some of the oldest, most rusted tracks I think we have in the system. After the Bronx Zoo, the two either fight or don’t. At times they are inseparable – riding together to the northern Bronx, happily to Nereid Ave. Other times, the fighting is too much for the 5 train to bear and it goes off on its own to Dyre Ave. Sometimes the 5 prefers to avoid the whole Bronx ordeal altogether and join with the 2 train only by chance, just to drop in as it runs express in the Bronx.

The relationship is doomed because the 5 train does not know itself. The 2 remains stalwart through it all, carrying of the largest burdens in the whole system – a three borough journey – a rare diagonal transversing of upper Manhattan, and the accompaniment of a fickle partner.

hot-car heroes

It is now the last weekend of October and according to the posters that have been placed on and around the 1 train over the course of the past month, this should be the last weekend of construction on the northernmost stations that have necessitated a transfer to the A train, and a shuttle bus in order to get in and out of the Bronx. But, no. Today, it was observed that a new posted has been made up, stating that the construction will extend through next weekend as well. I don’t bring this up because I am so surprised that the work was not finished by the time it was stated that it would be finished. I bring it up because it is annoying that they would even try to have us believe that this wouldn’t be the case in the first place. I am not expecting service to be normal any time soon on the weekends here in the western Bronx. In fact, I am pretty certain that by the time service is restored on the weekend, we will be so thoroughly accustomed to the process of getting to the A train that the restoration of Bronx 1 service will come across as an inconvenience in some way. Maybe you’ve developed an affinity for passing Isham Park. Maybe you like stopping off at Piper’s Kilt for a drink on your way to the Bronx, etc. You won’t have cause to do those things anymore if the 1 were actually working correctly…

The MTA has invested so much space and paper in announcing service delays and changes.

Meanwhile, getting on the 1 train today at 18^th street, I was hit with the oppressive heat of the non-climate controlled car. At times, it is possible to tell before even walking in the train if either the car has an especially pungent homeless person in it, or if the climate control is not working. These cars will be empty. Not today. Today’s commute was filled with hot-car heroes en route to a sweaty coronation. I walked between cars, despite its being illegal, and arrived in a less crowded, more climate controlled car. I’m not saying I’m Captain Air-Conditioning, but something must be done in terms of making the process of traveling through underground tunnels appear acceptable and unlike a horror movie. Actually, when in Stockholm over the summer, I was aghast to find out that their metros and trams did not have air-conditioning (and to boot, they had windows that opened like the windows on our subways, that is, they pull open in and down from the top so that the window angles all of the air up towards the ceiling where it does nobody much good). In Stockholm, the issue was that summers are so short that it was not worth the investment in climate control technology. I happened to visit during one of their hotter weeks, so I was given a bad impression. Apparently, it is the same throughout much of Europe.

In New York, though, why be a hot-car hero? Are people so lazy that they can’t be bothered to go to the next car to alleviate a situation that is bad (hot cars are always compounded by the fact that people rarely open the windows in these situations (I can recall a time when I opened the window on a hot car (which I stayed on only because the next car was jam packed) and the looks and comments I got from people were those that should be reserved for political liberators and true artists who’ve spoken for the disenfranchised). Are people beaten down by continual inconsistencies in service? Is there value to suffering? Or is it a way of protesting - like a hunger strike – people hope that an MTA official will come by, see the sweat dripping and the displeasure in people’s forehead rumples, feel bad, and change things? This will be a long wait…

lights out

Remember the 80’s? I do. Those were the days when the lights in the subway cars used to blink and flash and flat out go dark for long periods of time. During those periods of prolonged darkness were the perfect times to rob, molest, and stab people. Ah, the good old days. Of course, today we have electronic messages instructing us as to the fact that a crowded subway is in fact not a valid excuse for molesting people. But, no similar pronouncement is made for a darkened subway car. Such is the hubris of the MTA during their move towards electronifying messages and psa’s that they assumed that their subway cars would always be crowded, but not dark. But yet, here I was, stepping onto the 1 train this morning at 225^th street, only to realize that - no it wasn’t just the crust in my eyes – the reason I couldn’t read my magazine was that the lights were out!

This is not the first time in recent months (maybe last couple years, even) that I’ve been on a train with flickering lights a la the 80’s. But, I must admit that this was the first straight up light outage that I’ve sat through in recent decades. I can’t say that I was too worried for anyone in terms of getting robbed, molested, or stabbed. It seems that even with this recent economic downturn, recent cuts to service and obvious neglect by the MTA, enough people are still under the impression – falsely gotten during the 90’s and early 2000’s, that they are middle class – or that they will one day become upper class – that on a whole, New Yorkers aren’t acting up or risking their freedom to confront injustices. Still, as far as signs go, I consider light outages on subway cars to be a bad one. And by bad I mean that a day may come soon when a dark subway car will be something to avoid or if need be to come on and have need for all of your working senses. Just a prediction.

Another 80’s (and perhaps beyond) feature of subway transport, but one that is not true anymore, is the muffled sound of the train operator announcements. Of course, back then I don’t remember as many service change announcements, but it was my general rule to not even try to listen to announcements made over the loudspeaker because they sounded like they were made by a person gargling tennis balls. It was not a worthwhile use of time. This has been upgraded. Now, the speakers are used to give the bad news of the service changes – but at least the news is intelligible. Also, the speakers are used as a forum for the public to be admonished. “STEP IN AND STAND CLEAR OF THE CLOSING DOORS!” Yelled the train operator today. And I mean yelled. He used a voice that made me, for a moment, feel at fault for something even though I was sitting peacefully, trying to make out words on my magazine page in the dark.

Later in my commute, I was standing on the 3 train. I imagined a contraption whose purpose it was to persuade people not to crowd in front of the door. This would be a series of laser beams infesting the area directly in front of the doors (generally speaking, the width of the doorway, the height of the train, and the depth of the rows of seats. These lasers would activate upon the closing of the doors, and would liquefy, no, pulverize, no, disintegrate anyone who stood in that area. I understand that this would mean that the problem of crowding would simply shift inward, not disappear. But, it would at least give a better reason for crowding. As it stands, it is difficult to stomach people who’s lack of perspective on the world allows them them luxury of stepping through the threshold of the doorway and simply standing there as though no-one might come into the train after them. Then, when the next station arrives, they simply sift at a 90 degree angle so that they are standing perpendicular to the doorway, as though this makes them invisible. Seriously though – this is not a blog about complaining about people. But, it should be mentioned that in this author’s viewpoint, it is perfectly acceptable to walk through people who are standing in the doorway of a subway car. It is also acceptable to raise your elbows when people begin entering the train before you’ve exited. Other than those quibbles, I am for the people…

crown jewel

When the 1 train pulled into 96^th street, there was a 3 train across the platform. However, as the 1 slowed down to its stop, the 3 began pulling out. I don’t mind this. I mean, I don’t like it; I would rather be able to make the connection. But, I don’t mind it on a service level. If the 3 train arrived at the station, opened its doors, let people out, let people on, and left the station – and when it left the station it happened to be at the exact moment that the 1 train pulled in across the platform then I’m okay with that. Now, I wish I had been able to make the connection so that I could have gotten to where I was going a bit earlier. But, I am not personally offended that the train did not wait to make the connection (There have been times, on the other hand, when I have been on the equivalent of that 3 train, sitting and waiting in a station for a long time only to pull out at the moment the 1 train pulled in across the platform. This is an incomprehensible practice.) in and of itself. This is a point of difference between myself and others. I have had conversations with more than one person who has used, upon entering a conversation about frustrating MTA situations, the example of a possible connecting train leaving the station at the moment when their train enters as the pinnacle, or absolute epitome of the inefficiency we must live with on a daily basis. I beg to differ. I would beseech such people to think outside of themselves a bit.

If an express train arrives in a station and has to wait, say, two minutes for a local to arrive in order to make a connection, then for those who have just arrived on the connecting local, that express train may as well have pulled into that station mere seconds ago. They don’t care. They are just happy that they can make an easy connection. They are convenienced. However, the people who are on that express train, who are forced to wait on a non-moving train are deeply inconvenienced. The people at the next station who are forced to wait an extra two minutes for their train are deeply inconvenienced not only by the extra wait, but also by the fact that two minutes worth of new passengers have come streaming into the station. So, not only are the trains two minutes later, but they are also two minutes more crowded – and this obviously compounds itself over time and subsequent stations. So, for the convenience of some, many are inconvenienced. And, what are the negative consequences of having people not have a train waiting for them to transfer to as they pull in on the local train? Well, if trains are running as they should – say, every five minutes during rush hour – then the most they will have to wait for a train is five minutes. There is an 80% chance that it will be less than five minutes. A reasonable amount, I would say. In the particular case of the 96^th street stop, there are two different express trains that might come, so really on average a train should be coming every two and a half minutes. This is a more than reasonable time for people who were on the 1 train to wait for a connecting express. The fact that people see an express train waiting in the station for local passengers to transfer to as a convenience only speaks to people’s selfishness and short-sightedness. I would, without hesitation, admit to considering the practice of holding trains in the station for the purposes of making connections with other trains to be the MOST INANE OF ALL INEFFICIENT MTA PRACTICES.

Anyway, I got off the 1 and waited for the 2, which came after more than a couple of minutes. I was standing over some young women and cringed to hear their conversations about fashion and bodies and orgies and other utterly expected topics. One strain of their conversation went to the body of a twenty-nine year old friend of theirs, who they all agreed that they would want to look like when they reach “that age”.

We pulled into the Times Square station at the same time as a 1 train – which was the 1 train I had been on in the first place. I transferred back to that 1 train, remembering my theory about getting off at 18^th being better then getting off at 14^th in my particular situation. However, the 1 train thwarted my plan by proceeding to sit in the station for a few minutes until the next 3 train arrived – so as to make a connection. I was, of course, incensed. And, there was a roach on the seat next to mine. I knocked it off with my book and it flew over near the boot of a woman sitting across from me (knee high boot, of course). I know she saw the whole thing happen, but she did not meet my eye to commiserate. She did not stomp on the roach, either.

divided

The F train was pulling into 14^th street as I began descending the stairs to the station. I heard it shriek to a stop, but I didn’t hurry up or anything, hoping to avoid an embarrassing situation where the train doors slam in my face as I am panting. I simply walked down the stairs, went through the turnstyle (I admit – perhaps a bit quickly to beat out the person heading toward the same turnstyle from the other direction), and carefully avoided the people walking up the stairs as I walked down. By the time I got to the lower half of the staircase and noticed that the train was still sitting there and only then did I hurry my pace a bit, because while I didn’t want to be shut out by the closing door, I felt it would have looked even dumber to have been shut out due to ostentatiously playing it cool.

I mention this not only to bring to you the inner workings of the mind of someone boarding the subway, but to try to illustrate approximately how long the F train had been sitting in the station. Well, needless to say, I got on the F train with a slight trot, and it sat in the station for even another couple of minutes. This is all quite enough time for any trains that this one might have been trailing to clear out ahead. However, even once the train did leave the station, it crept and crawled, crept and crawled.

By the time we got to 34^th street, the train was outlandishly crowded and the conductor was getting upset with people for holding the doors open. The inevitable announcement came, alerting people that they would be advised to wait for the next train, as it is right behind this one. But, of course the next train is right behind this one. It had probably started off about five to eight minutes behind this one, as per the schedule. But, with the speed this train was running, of course the train behind it had caught up. So then what was the problem? Having a train tailing another train is not good practice, and the avoidance of that very situation was the only possible reason I had thought of for the train staying at 14^th street for so long. So, if we don’t care about having trains trail each other – and in fact advertise it as a way to appease customers who don’t fit on to crowded trains – then why did we wait at 14^th street and then creep along the rest of the way? (by the way, I waited at the Lexington avenue stop, where I got off, to check to see that there was in fact another train right behind this one – and there was.) A possible answer for this one is that not only do they not not mind having trains trail each other, but they actually like it! They would rather have a window of 2 minutes at a given station where service is quick and trains are abundant, than the mundanity of consistent, reliable service. It is part of the [escalating nerves à release] cycle of emotions that we are manipulated into. Waiting, waiting, waiting, abundance.

After 34^th street, and the conductor angrily telling people not to crowd and to stand clear of the doors and that the doors can’t close unless you stop holding them, etc. the train crept away. No sooner than it was out of the station did the electronic message play, telling people to guard their belongings and not display them, especially electronic devices. I find it ironic that they would employ an electronic device to tell us all to not display electronic devices. Such is their self-assuredness and confidence that we are all so desperate for guardian figures that we would accept hypocritical and patronizing messages from a subway car. Of course, we were also reminded, by the electronic voice, to “remain alert and have a safe day.” Soon thereafter, a woman was trying to get off the train and knocked into another woman, who got angry and yelled, “say excuse me!” Tensions were high, manners were sought. But, how can we think about manners when we are so busy remaining alert? Seriously though, people shouldn’t let the electronic messages divide us. Just because it is implied that everyone on the train is a thief and after your electronic devices, or a pervert who wants to molest you just because the train is crowded, doesn’t mean that we have to be rude to each other. The fact that the train is so crowded that it is hard to move is more to blame for the person bumping into you – not their bad manners. The reason the train is so crowded is because it spent so much time at 14^th street taking on waves and waves of passengers and allowing waves and waves of waiting passengers to accumulate at the subsequent stations.

"accident"

Again, the 6 train took its time getting to Union Square. I was waiting in the station for seven minutes and the platform was packed by the time I got there – I doubt a train had just left. When it did come, everyone packed on to the train as per normal and I didn’t have to be involved with any of the next-to-the-door choreography politics since I was going deep into the Bronx and wouldn’t have to worry about the door for another forty five minutes. As the train got peopled, an announcement came over the loudspeaker indicating that the train was sitting in the station for an extra few minutes at the behesting of one “train dispatcher.” I’m not exactly sure why this would have happened, but I wasn’t surprised. Between 14^th street and 42^nd street, the train rested in each station for an extra 10 or so seconds – not enough time to warrant an announcement, but enough to be noticeable and to allow ones sense that something is not quite right to begin activating. At Grand Central, the train became even more packed and the conductor came on, a male voice, stating that customers should not despair because “there are trains behind us” and that “all available doors” should be used. “Are people using unavailable doors?” said a man speaking to his younger female friend. All in all, the male conductor’s voice was fairly relaxed and cordial, but then a female voice came over the loudspeaker a bit more agitated to announce that “We are having delays, so there is crowding. If you don’t fit in the train step aside of the doors and wait for the next train!” and I thought this was odd. I mean, clearly the train was having delays. But, if I remembered correctly, the delay was at least partially created by the fact that the train had been held in Union Square for mysterious reasons by the “dispatcher.” And then, delays were compounded by extended stays in each of the subsequent stations. How do all of these things fit together? Is there some different word that we should be using other than “delay” to describe when trains come late due to non-technical or mechanical issues? The train being held in the station by the “dispatcher” is not a delay – it is a purposeful act. Anyway, I don’t know that the vocabulary exists to describe what that is, which makes it all the more frustrating. Like, when someone pretends to pour water on your head just to mess around, and then winds up actually pouring the water on you – even if he didn’t mean to wet you, can that really be called an accident? Not really. But, I don’t think we have a word for that…

Anyway, at 59^th street the announcement was made that 86^th street would be the next stop. We would bypass the next few stops. I can only presume that this measure is taken so as to atone for the “delays” and to bring the train back closer to “schedule.” But I ask this: who cares about a subway schedule? Just send the trains and keep regular service! So, at 86^th street, some of the people waiting there might not have had to have waited as long for their train to arrive as a result of the skipping many stops method of delay correction. But, even more people are inconvenienced. Everyone that had to get off at 68^th and 77^th was inconvenienced because they had to get off the train and wait for another. Everyone waiting at the platform on 68^th and 77^th street was inconvenienced because not only did they have to wait for an extended period of time, but now they had to watch a train pass them by for no reason and wait for an extra few minutes for the next train. Basically, everything gained by skipping the stops is lost from the perspective of those who either get off or on at 68^th or 77^th. Not to mention that after 59^th street, with the exception of 125^th street, more people are getting off than on the train, so crowding wouldn’t be the issue. So again, why skip the stops? To maintain a schedule? Then why hold the train in the station at Union Square?

respectfully...

At the Union Square station, the 4, 5, 6 platform was such that people’s stomachs were touching other people’s backs. It was rush hour, so, fair engouh – it’s always like that. Still, it got worse every second. I was waiting for the 6 train in particular, so when the 5 came I had no other emotion besides a vague hope that the station would clear out just a bit. No such luck, a certain amount of people crushed onto the 5, but just as many got out to wait for the 6. The platform was as it was except for the particular stomachs touching the particular backs. Some more time passed before the 6 train came and of course by that time, the platform was nearly unbearable, and getting on the train itself was an effort. Whenever this is the case, and it is usually somewhere between midtown and downtown Manhattan, where the subways are so, so packed – there are always a few tourists on the train that find the whole thing fun and charming. This time was no exception – some Brits, not holding on, and giggling each time they stumbled and knocked into someone. New Yorkers rolled their eyes. Also, usually, in this situation is the guy who is saying the things that everyone is kind of thinking: “Hey! Move in, there is plenty of space in the middle!” This time was no exception either. There is always plenty of space in the middle of the car because people like, or, would rather crowd around the door than move all the way in because they don’t want to get stuck in the middle of the car when it is their turn to get off. The guy trying to squeeze in and telling everyone to move in was a large guy with a deep, booming voice. The type of voice that is probably used to getting what it wants. He had a good sense of humor too. One woman, a type who was probably in her thirties but looked fifty, angry and with lines in her face, muttering to herself and shaking her head, called back, “Where do you want us to go? You want us to just push people?” Everyone else just pretended they heard neither person. The man, realizing he had found someone who was probably a bit emotionally fragile, kept repeating himself and pointing out spots where there was space. No-one moved, but the woman kept muttering and shaking her head with increased purpose. The man whispered into his girlfriend’s ear and pointed at the woman with his chin each time he was about to say something. The girlfriend made like she was embarrassed, but you could tell she thought the whole thing was funny.

Then,

The conductor came on the loudspeaker when we got to 23^rd street to let everyone know that they should not push, not crowd, not worry, because there is another train right behind this one. In fact, he said, people should consider not even getting on this train. Nobody listened, of course, and the announcement was made at each and every station (until 59^th street when the train emptied out to a reasonable riding capacity) with increased exasperation. Now, perhaps there was another train right behind this one. Perhaps people would have been better off waiting for that train – maybe everyone would have been overall more comfortable. But, why should it come to that? The problem isn’t really that people are so impatient and overzealous to get on the train. The problem is that they’ve been waiting for 10 minutes during rush hour and they don’t want to wait another 10 minutes. Why should we take it at its word that there is another train right behind this one? What does right behind mean? How do we know that train wont be just as crowded? Why should it be like that? Why not just send the trains out at regular intervals? I mean, Union Square is fairly early into the run of the 6 train - some 5 stops in. in those 5 stops, there are no connections to make – there were no trains ahead of this one delaying it (I know that because I waited for 10 minutes and no train passed). If the train is irregularly crowded it is because trains are not being sent out at regular intervals, not because people don’t know how to get on trains and are impatient. So, the next time you hear that announcement – not to crowd on to the trains and to wait for the next train that is right behind this one, think about why the situation came up in the first place. Think about the structure of the announcements and the ways in which they are structured to put people at fault for being impatient and somehow bad (and I would not blame the conductors for this – I realize that it is not as though they are writing and developing these announcements…). What these announcements should say is: “we fucked up again. There is another train right behind this one, and we are not telling this to you because we are proud of ourselves. We are totally aware of the fact that having a train right behind this one is reflective of our poor scheduling practices and might even be some sort of psychological experiment to pack you onto trains in a dehumanizing kind of way and see what happens. I must say, you have all comported yourselves wonderfully. Still, all things considered, and again, we are deeply apologetic about the fact that we’ve put you in this situation (you will be reimbursed at the exit, don’t worry. You will also be given chocolate.), the train behind this one is most likely less crowded than the one you are on. I am giving you my promise that the train is no more than one station behind this one. If you get off this train and have to wait more than sixty seconds for the next one to arrive, then you will get a free monthly metro-card. So, do as you please – you are, after all, the paying customer – but, just know that the option is there for you to take the train behind this one.”

pacifiers

Oh, I’m not saying that the MTA isn’t doing anything for the betterment of their service. No, the word “betterment” there is an imprecise one. I think I mean, “advancement.” “Advancement” implies that things are being done, but it is a pretty value-neutral word. Advancement is not necessarily a good thing; it just implies that things are being done to spruce up old systems. Clearly, what I am about to discuss is not something I feel value-neutral about. So, you may ask, why use a value-neutral word?

Anyway, the issue is this: there are a number of computerized messages forced upon subway riders of New York City. These are mainly, but not exclusively in the newer trains (which aren’t so new anymore). The voices are not computerized in the older trains. I don’t want to go on about each and every message right now. However, while I was on the 2 train this morning, between 72^nd and 42^nd street, a whole cluster of messages was played one after the other, all ending the same way: “remain alert, and have a safe day.” “Remain alert?” “Have a safe day?” What are we? Scared rabbits on the African savannah? Are these the most important things that a train can think to tell its customers? Are we really meant to believe that the train has our best interests in mind in the midst of this dangerous world? Why not, “Have a good day” or “Have a day in which you get to your destinations on time”? Something the train could actually do something about… well the obvious answer is that it is a tool of pacification.

Also a tool of pacification: the digitized timers that tell you when the trains are going to arrive. I think they currently only have them on the L, 1, and 6 lines – though I could be wrong. I was originally all for this, since it is such an easy technology to employ. I mean, cell phones have gps on them these days – I think the subway system can manage some sort of location technology. But, as I see them in action, all I can see is a tool of pacification. First of all, if they really wanted to do any good, they should put the timers outside the station so that people could see whether they had to run down the stairs to catch a train, or see if they had time to go get a coffee or something like that before the train arrives. But no. The way the timers are placed now, you have to be down in the station already in order to see when the next train will be arriving. Yes, it is nice to know on some level, but it doesn’t change anything. The whole idea is to pacify people. Make them less impatient. Subdue the New Yorker’s urge to lean over the edge of the platform and peek down the tunnel. Make it so that people might seem less justified in complaining. Pacify them into thinking that everything is under control.

the voids

People think that there is a great void, or, a black hole that exists underneath the seats on the subway. They get on and, usually will be eating something and then throw the bag from which the food came underneath the seat, on the floor. Generally speaking, great care is taken to ball and crumple up the bag so that it is as compact as can be (presumably so that it will fit all the more snug in the black hole). This is the worst type of person, perhaps, in the world. First of all, littering is ridiculous in New York City – we have garbage cans on every corner. It is dirty, it shows a lack of any type of meaningful thinking: what is going to happen to the garbage after you throw it on the ground? How does this affect other people? Would I be happy living here if everyone acted this way? These types of socially responsible questions, which reflect a certain order of though, are nonexistent. Then there is the aspect of the people just not caring at all, or, feeling entitled to act any way they want. Now, when it comes to the subways, I understand that people might feel entitled to some services they are not necessarily receiving – like consistent subway service, for one. And, I also understand that it is perhaps a behavior that is born out of some sense of alienation to begin with. Still. It’s nasty and easy to not do. A woman, however, did it at 157^th street. From then on she looked like a pig monster to me. Every mouth movement of her chewing looked like something out of 2 girls 1 cup.

I got out at 96^th street to transfer to the express even though it wasn’t already in the station. I was running late and I knew it would be soon. The 1 train I had been on waited in the station until the 3 arrived. When the 3 pulled into the station, the 1 pulled out. Many people I’ve talked to see this act – the pulling out of one train while another arrives – as the most insidious of all train scheduling maneuvers. I would respectfully disagree, however, and say that the waiting in the first place is the most insidious.

Anyway, the 3 was running well. Aside from yet another woman balling something up and putting it under the seat (this time it was a Metro newspaper that was left on the seat for the next passenger, who was her but she didn’t want it), the ride was painless until we left 34^th street. As the train was passing by the 18^th street station, we slowed to a crawl and then stopped altogether. We were stuck there for three and a half minutes, during which time I contemplated just going in between cars and hopping off the train. I didn’t do it for a few reasons: the reason was not that I was afraid of the third rail – I’m not Ramo. The two reasons that i consciously thought of were a) if the train started moving while I was climbing out, it would have caused me an embarrassing death with perhaps my foot trapped in the train and my head bouncing off of each post separating the tracks. It was partially a romantic thought, that I should perish symbolically as a martyr for the cause of good train service and not frustrating people to the point where they are willing to do life risking stuff just to get to work. I would be an anti-capitalist, pro-commuter symbol in that way. But, without having written a manifesto beforehand, I would simply be a guy who died in a stupid way on the subway. I know how those guys are treated, and it isn’t flattering. The other reason was that I didn’t want my hands to get so dirty when propelling myself up onto the platform. It was too early in the morning to have such dirty hands – even for a farmer. The announcement made was that a 2 train was in the 14^th street station having trouble getting out. It is always the train ahead of you’s fault. This can’t always be that case, but that train makes an easy scapegoat as people are already a bit upset at that train for having left before they could catch it.

Later in the day, I was on the 6 train, which had an entire car non-functional. That is, an entire car empty and with its doors unable to open. This was during afternoon rush hour. Aside from being appalled at the low-budgetness of it all, I was actually a bit sad to see such a lifeless, white and grey prototype passing by, devoid of all the human happiness contained in its neighboring cars. Poor it.

playing catch-up

The 1 train was held by the dispatcher at 137^th street after creeping into the station from 145^th. Normally when I complain about the train being held, it’s because I know for a fact that there is no other train in front of the one I’m in and therefore no reason for the hold-up. In this particular case, I was not able to make such an assumption because I had to run up the stairs two by two in order to catch the train waiting at the 225^th street station, so I didn’t have any way of knowing how long it had taken for that train to arrive and thus how reasonable it was to be held by the dispatcher at 137^th. I mean, in my mind, it is never reasonable to be held in a station – but it’s less reasonable when a 10 minute gap has preceded the arrival of a train at any given station.

At 116^th street, the next station was announced as being 103^rd street, but it was not announced that 110^th street was being skipped. Nobody seemed alarmed by this, perhaps because no-one heard the announcement perhaps because everyone was wearing headphones, or maybe that they just know the tone taken when being told that their stop would be skipped and the tone in this case was a casual tone. The mistake was never addressed and anyway it was clear for some invisible reason that he had simply meant to say 110^th street but didn’t. Since I was only 2 stops removed from being held in a station by the dispatcher, and was feeling generally spiteful towards the MTA, it occurred to me that this type of human error would have been unlikely were we on the 2 or 6 or L or any of the other mechanized voice trains. I shook that thought from my head, though, as mechanized voice trains are the primary villain in the saga of the subway commuter. I will get to why one of these days.

We pulled into 96^th street at the same time as a 2 train and I was able to run across the platform for a transfer. On the 2 train, we passed a 1 train at 66^th street and another at 50^th street. Although the 2 slowed to a crawl after passing the 1 train at 50^th street, letting that train then pass the 2 once again, yet it still waited at 42^nd street with doors open until the 2 train riders were able to transfer across the platform. I was one of those tranferers. I was ambivalent about the transfer for a second or two because I thought to myself that if the 1 train then waited at 42^nd street for the next express to come, I would have begun talking out loud. But, I decided that it was worth it anyway because were I to get off the express at 14^th street, I would really be at 12^th street because I was all the way at the front of the train (I didn’t have time to walk to my normal spot on the platform at 225^th street). I would have to walk back up to 17^th street and the time I gained by staying on the express would have been lost by being farther from my eventual destination. The 18^th street exit on the 1 train, on the other hand, is more toward the middle of the station, so even if I was at the front of the train, I wouldn’t have too much extra walking to do. As it turned out, everything was fine and all trains left when they should.

I was trying, however, to think of how much time I had saved by transferring to the 2 and then catching up with not one, but two 1 trains and arriving at 18^th street two 1 trains ahead of where I got on at 225^th. I figured that by the time we passed the 1 train at 66^th street, the 1 train I had originally been on would have been at, say, 79^th street. This was a difference of only 2 stops between 1 trains. This is, if everything is running correctly, about two minutes between trains. But, another 1 train was also passed at 50^th street – just another two stops away and thus another difference of two minutes. Using this logic, if I were to have arrived at 225^th street four minutes before I did, I would have been on the train that I eventually wound up on. Something tells me, though, that this is not the case. Trains do not usually come two minutes after one another. They are not scheduled to, anyway. At rush hour, they are generally scheduled four minutes apart, or so. There were some delays. I think I would have had to get to the 225^th street station, I estimate, eight minutes before I did in order to get the 1 train I wound up arriving at 18^th street on. That’s what I think. The sad news is that I was still late to work…

Later in the day, the R train was found going at a reduced speed between 28^th street and 34^th street. No explanation. There was also a +5 second time differential between when the conductor announced that we should stand clear of the closing doors, and the actual closing of the doors. A guy and a girl – perhaps colleagues, discussed the authenticity of a homeless man asking for money. To the guy, he did not smell bad enough to warrant full homeless status. He postulated that while there may be showers in shelters, people didn’t really use them all that much. This guy did not smell bad. The guy thought that train begging was a “pretty good gig.” For the girl, his authenticity didn’t matter – if he had had a kid, though, with him – she would have given money, no questions asked.